Question: I don't understand why coaches challenge almost meaningless plays such as when Coach Tomlin challenged an 11-yard play in the middle of the game when Cleveland wasn't even across midfield. Wouldn't it make more sense to save the challenges for more important plays such as touchdowns, fumbles, interceptions or "splash plays"?

Jeff Mathews, Elizabeth Township

BOUCHETTE: I agree. As much as I hate instant replay, the idea of it was for calls on potential big plays to be corrected if they were wrong. The nit-picking calls, such as the one you refer to, do not fall into that category. When coaches do that, I secretly hope that a wrong call is made on a big, game-turning play and they have no challenges left because they used their two up on inconsequential plays earlier in the game.

As much as I hate instant replay, the idea of it was for calls on potential big plays to be corrected if they were wrong. The nit-picking calls, such as the one you refer to, do not fall into that category. When coaches do that, I secretly hope that a wrong call is made on a big, game-turning play and they have no challenges left because they used their two up on inconsequential plays earlier in the game.

Yeah, me too, Ed. Nothing I like more than listening to a bunch of crybaby assholes whining that the refs were paid off.

Not to mention when there's an obviously blown call, but you can't challenge it just because you don't have any timeouts. That happened in the 49ers game a week or two ago on a kickoff-return fumble right after Atlanta scored on them. Guy was obviously down, but the refs let them play through because they're afraid to blow anything dead this year. Then the 49ers couldn't challenge it even though they supposedly had all their challenges left, and two plays later it was another touchdown and they were out of the game.

The one thing that is often ignored is the TIMING of these challenges. You can use it as an extended TO, and I've seen coaches use it effectively to break an offenses/QB's rhythm. If you are thinking of calling a TO anyway, why not throw the challenge flag on anything questionable? The worst that can happen is you lose a TO that you were going to burn anyway, and maybe you'll get the call...but I wouldn't do this often or too early, as there are limits to challenges.

Question: I don't understand why coaches challenge almost meaningless plays such as when Coach Tomlin challenged an 11-yard play in the middle of the game when Cleveland wasn't even across midfield. Wouldn't it make more sense to save the challenges for more important plays such as touchdowns, fumbles, interceptions or "splash plays"?

Jeff Mathews, Elizabeth Township

BOUCHETTE: I agree. As much as I hate instant replay, the idea of it was for calls on potential big plays to be corrected if they were wrong. The nit-picking calls, such as the one you refer to, do not fall into that category. When coaches do that, I secretly hope that a wrong call is made on a big, game-turning play and they have no challenges left because they used their two up on inconsequential plays earlier in the game.

The one thing that is often ignored is the TIMING of these challenges. You can use it as an extended TO, and I've seen coaches use it effectively to break an offenses/QB's rhythm. If you are thinking of calling a TO anyway, why not throw the challenge flag on anything questionable? The worst that can happen is you lose a TO that you were going to burn anyway, and maybe you'll get the call...but I wouldn't do this often or too early, as there are limits to challenges.

I agree revefsreleets. That is the only reasoning I can come up with on some of Tomlin's challenges. Like you mentioned some coaches will use it as an extended TO to throw off a team's momentum.